Accessibility settings

This paper is in the following e-collection/theme issue:

Viewpoint and Opinions on Innovation in Medical Education (260) e-Learning and Digital Medical Education (1648) New Methods and Approaches in Medical Education (679) Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality in Medical Education (252) Urology (69) Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Medical Education (862) Generative Language Models Including ChatGPT (1638)

Published on in Vol 12 (2026)

Preprints (earlier versions) of this paper are available at https://preprints.jmir.org/preprint/93235, first published .
Two medical professionals in blue scrubs examine urology scans on interactive displays.

Integrating Large Language Models and Metaverse-Related Technologies in Urology Education: Viewpoint

Integrating Large Language Models and Metaverse-Related Technologies in Urology Education: Viewpoint

Authors of this article:

Peizhe Li1 Author Orcid Image ;   Huijie Gong1 Author Orcid Image ;   Heyang Liu1 Author Orcid Image ;   Siyu Han1 Author Orcid Image ;   Yiqin Lu2 Author Orcid Image ;   Yongji Yan1 Author Orcid Image
Article Authors Cited by Tweetations Metrics

    1Department of Urology, Dongzhimen Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, No. 5, Haiyuncang, Dongcheng District, Beijing, China

    2Department of Gynecology, Dongzhimen Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China

    *these authors contributed equally

    Corresponding Author:

    Yongji Yan, PhD


    Urology education must prepare learners to integrate anatomical visualization, diagnostic reasoning, technical performance, communication, and ethical judgment, often under restricted working hours and limited access to high-fidelity cases. This viewpoint argues that large language models (LLMs) and metaverse-related technologies should be integrated as complementary, supervised educational tools rather than treated as autonomous replacements for educators or clinical experience. LLMs can support cognitive apprenticeship, documentation practice, assessment, and communication simulations, whereas extended reality, cloud computing, and virtual digital humans can support spatial, procedural, and remote learning. Our aim is to articulate 3 key messages: first, the educational value of these technologies depends on alignment with defined urological competencies; second, implementation should proceed in stages from governed data infrastructure to intelligent interaction and immersive multimodal training; and third, educational effectiveness must be established through prospective evaluations of transfer to clinical performance, not through technical novelty alone. We emphasize the need for rigorous randomized controlled trials, identify requirements for haptic and biomechanical fidelity, and discuss hallucination, bias, privacy, accountability, and deskilling. The responsible future of intelligent urology education will therefore require collaboration among learners, educators, clinicians, engineers, ethicists, institutions, and professional bodies.

    JMIR Med Educ 2026;12:e93235

    doi:10.2196/93235

    Keywords

    large language model; metaverse; artificial intelligence; AI; medical education; urology education 


    Educational Requirements in Urology

    Training a urologist takes more than textbook recall. Residents need a working grasp of pelvic and retroperitoneal anatomy, have to read imaging, endoscopic findings, and pathology together, and must carry out precise operations. The work is also intimate and often distressing. Trainees have to counsel patients through oncological uncertainty, discuss loss of sexual or reproductive function, and manage stomas or urinary incontinence with tact.

    However, clinical service alone rarely provides adequate, deliberate practice for these varied competencies. Duty-hour restrictions, patient safety obligations, and ethical limits on novice practice substantially narrow hands-on opportunities in the operating room and outpatient clinic [1]. The move toward advanced laparoscopy and robotic platforms adds a steep learning curve: fine bimanual control and spatial translation are hard to learn safely at the bedside [2]. The problem is clearest in uncommon or sensitive situations, such as penile cancer counseling, talks about sexual function, urinary diversion, fertility preservation, and disclosure of an uncertain cancer diagnosis [3].

    Aim and Viewpoint of This Article

    This article is a viewpoint based on published work on AI, large language models (LLMs), virtual patients, extended reality (XR), robotic surgery, simulation, and medical education, together with our experience as urological and medical educators. We discuss 3 key points. First, LLMs and metaverse-related technologies cover different but linked parts of training; LLMs can support cognitive and communicative learning, while XR and related systems can support spatial and procedural learning [4]. Second, these tools should be brought in through a staged, competency-based, and human-supervised framework. Third, claims of educational benefit should rest on validated measures and evidence of transfer to clinical performance, not on realism, usability, or model accuracy alone.


    General-Purpose and Specialized LLMs

    General-purpose LLMs can explain concepts, generate questions, summarize literature, role-play clinical conversations, and provide feedback on written reasoning [5,6]. Their flexibility makes them useful for early exploratory learning [6,7]. However, a general-purpose model may lack reliable knowledge of local workflows, specialty terminology, guideline updates, or the clinical context required for urological decision-making. It may also produce fluent but unsupported answers.

    A specialized or retrieval-augmented model can be limited to curated guidelines, institutional protocols, checked teaching materials, and properly deidentified cases [8]. Fine-tuning or retrieval augmentation may improve specialty relevance, traceability, and consistency, but neither approach guarantees correctness [9]. A tuned model can reproduce errors or biases present in its source data, and a retrieval system can return an outdated, incomplete, or poorly matched document. Accordingly, educators should compare general-purpose and specialized models against an expert-annotated reference set before deployment and should display source provenance, uncertainty, and the date of guideline retrieval whenever feasible [8,10].

    Uses in Assessment and Clinical Reasoning

    LLMs may assist, but should not independently determine, several components of urological assessment. Potential applications include generating formative questions; evaluating the completeness of a history or operative note; identifying whether a learner considered relevant differential diagnoses; providing structured feedback on documentation; and analyzing simulated consultations for missed questions, unclear explanations, or inappropriate language [11-13]. They may also support oral examinations by presenting sequential information, such as a patient with gross hematuria whose history, urinalysis, imaging, cystoscopy, and pathology findings are released progressively.

    In urological oncology, an educational system should teach diagnostic algorithms rather than merely provide final answers. For example, a hematuria case may require risk assessment, urine testing, imaging selection, cystoscopic evaluation, and interpretation of pathology. A prostate cancer case may require integration of prostate-specific antigen, digital rectal examination, multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging, targeted or systematic biopsy, grade group, staging, and patient preferences. A renal mass case may require consideration of imaging phenotype, renal function, tumor complexity, metastatic evaluation, and the trade-off between oncological control and renal preservation. These pathways should be represented as branching decisions with explicit uncertainty and should be linked to expert-verified guidelines and contemporary diagnostic literature [14-16].

    The appropriate educational role of an LLM is therefore to make reasoning visible and discussable. It can ask why a learner selected a test, identify missing information, compare plausible options, and prompt reflection. It should not silently replace the learner’s reasoning or present one recommendation as universally correct. Representative LLMs illustrate the range of possible applications, from clinical knowledge reasoning and electronic health record processing to virtual patient simulation and guideline-based tutoring (Table 1).

    Table 1. Representative large language models and their potential applications in urology education.
    ModelsDeveloper/researcherKey featuresPotential applications in urology education
    Med-PaLM 2Google Research [9]Clinical knowledge reasoning and performance on USMLE-stylea evaluationsGenerates complex decision-making questions and serves as a virtual examiner for advanced resident training
    GatorTronUniversity of Florida [17]Trained on large volumes of EHRsb and designed to process clinical narrative languageSimulates urological clinic dialogues and medical records for interview and documentation training
    AIPatientYu et al [18]EHR-based knowledge graphs and retrieval-augmented generation for virtual patient interviewingProvides high-fidelity practice for breaking bad news and preoperative communication, with performance assessment
    BioMedLMStanford University and MosaicML [19]Biomedical literature comprehension and generationSupports literature review and research skills development on urological topics
    UroBotHetz et al [20]Urology question answering enhanced with EAUc guidelinesProvides guideline-based tutoring and knowledge tracing

    aUSMLE: United States Medical Licensing Examination.

    bEHR: electronic health record.

    cEAU: European Association of Urology.

    Hallucination, Empathy, and Human Supervision

    LLM errors are not limited to isolated factual mistakes. They may include input-related errors caused by ambiguous, incomplete, or incorrectly transcribed data; general knowledge errors in which the model produces an inaccurate medical statement; retrieval-related errors caused by irrelevant or outdated sources; reasoning errors in which correct facts are combined incorrectly; and communication errors in which an emotionally inappropriate response is phrased fluently [10]. In a sensitive consultation, an apparently empathic sentence may still be clinically misleading, culturally inappropriate, or insufficiently responsive to the patient’s distress.

    These limits matter most when an LLM is used to simulate a patient with cancer or sexual health concerns. The system should be restricted to teaching, clearly labeled as simulated, watched by an educator, and blocked from unsupervised clinical advice. Feedback to trainees should cover not only facts, but also empathy, privacy, shared decision-making, and psychosocial needs. The instructor still has to review the scenario, correct errors, and lead the debrief [21-24].


    XR and Surgical Simulation

    The educational value of virtual reality, augmented reality, and mixed reality lies in repeated practice, controlled variation of difficulty, spatial visualization, and the possibility of objective data capture [4,25]. Virtual reality may support laparoscopic, endoscopic, and robotic skills, while augmented reality and mixed reality can overlay patient-specific anatomy or imaging information onto a physical environment. Studies of urological simulation have shown gains in selected technical tasks, including transurethral procedures, robotic needle passing, and endoscopic spatial orientation [26-30]. These findings support XR as a training method. However, XR does not, by itself, show shorter operative time, fewer complications, better oncological results, or lasting transfer to independent clinical work.

    Haptic and Biomechanical Fidelity

    A credible surgical simulator must address more than visual realism. Laparoscopic and robotic skills also depend on force perception, instrument-tissue interaction, tissue deformation, traction, cutting resistance, needle passage, and recognition of abnormal structures. Urological tissues also differ in elasticity, vascularity, fragility, and response to manipulation. A simulator that provides visually appealing anatomy, but unrealistic resistance, may teach inappropriate force application [31].

    Technical needs include real-time tissue deformation models, collision detection, instrument friction, variable tissue stiffness, bleeding and smoke, camera-control limits, and latency low enough for force feedback. Haptic systems should be calibrated against expert-defined task requirements and, where possible, against physical or instrumented reference data. Higher fidelity is not always better. The level of fidelity should match the skill being taught, the learner’s stage, safety, cost, and evidence of benefit. Future validation studies should report haptic fidelity apart from visual fidelity and test whether each one improves measured performance.

    Remote Learning and Virtual Digital Humans

    Cloud computing can take on heavy rendering, storage, analytics, and remote access. Remote and virtual surgical teaching may widen access to expert instruction, especially where faculty or equipment are scarce [32-35]. Virtual digital humans can provide an embodied interface for LLM-based patients, mentors, or examiners, combining dialogue with gestures, facial expressions, anatomical models, and scenario-specific behavior [36,37]. Their educational benefit will depend on the accuracy of their clinical content, the appropriateness of their affective responses, the quality of their multimodal interaction, and the extent to which learners perceive the scenarios as educationally authentic.

    A further concern is that highly repeatable and technically perfect AI-generated cases may be valued less than real cases containing ambiguity, workflow interruptions, competing priorities, and ethically difficult decisions. Case systems should therefore include controlled variability and realistic clinical dilemmas rather than presenting idealized pathways only [38].


    Data and Governance Foundation

    We propose a 3-stage implementation framework that moves from a governed data and infrastructure foundation to intelligent interaction and then immersive training. The framework is summarized in Figure 1. The first stage is the creation of a governed teaching-data infrastructure. Relevant materials may include deidentified histories, laboratory results, imaging, endoscopy, pathology, operative videos, and assessment rubrics. Data should be minimized, access controlled, documented, and reviewed for representativeness. Educational datasets should not be assembled from electronic health records without appropriate institutional approval, deidentification, data use agreements, and safeguards against reidentification [8,10,17,39].

    ‎
    Figure 1. A framework for the synergistic integration of large language models and the metaverse in urology education. EHR: electronic health record; LLM: large language model.

    Intelligent Interaction

    The second stage is the development of specialty-aware agents that retrieve approved content, present cases progressively, ask targeted questions, and provide explainable feedback. Agents should record the information used to generate an answer, distinguish evidence from inference, and escalate uncertain or unsafe outputs to a human educator. General-purpose LLMs may be used for low-risk brainstorming or language practice, whereas higher-risk diagnostic and assessment tasks should use constrained systems validated against expert standards.

    Immersive Multimodal Training

    The third stage places these agents in XR environments. Consider a simulated patient with visible hematuria. The learner first takes a history, looks for risk factors and red flags, explains the initial workup, reviews imaging, interprets cystoscopic findings, and discusses the pathology report. The LLM-based patient can show anxiety and ask questions, while the XR environment shows anatomy and procedural steps. The educator can then review the diagnostic sequence, communication, time use, unnecessary tests, and technical performance. A similar prostate cancer case may combine magnetic resonance imaging interpretation, biopsy counseling, staging, treatment discussion, and concerns about sexual function. The aim is not a perfect virtual world; it is to bring cognitive, technical, and humanistic skills together in a setting that is safe and can be assessed [4,26,37].


    Prospective Randomized Controlled Trials

    Rigorous, well-designed randomized controlled trials are essential to establish whether LLM- and metaverse-supported educational tools improve urology training beyond conventional approaches. Future studies should prioritize clinically meaningful and validated outcomes rather than technological novelty, learner satisfaction, or simulator scores alone. Relevant domains include technical performance, diagnostic reasoning, communication, retention, and, critically, transfer of learning to supervised clinical practice. Outcome selection should reflect the specific competency targeted by the intervention and should be informed by established work on diagnostic complexity and objective assessment in XR [31]. Confidence in such evidence will also depend on sufficiently independent assessment and appropriate consideration of variation in learner experience and training context. Equally important, evaluation should examine the durability, generalizability, and potential unintended educational effects of these tools. Evidence of improved performance within a simulated environment, although valuable, should not be considered sufficient to demonstrate clinical competence or justify broad educational implementation.

    Ethical, Logistical, and Equity Considerations

    LLM and metaverse systems can be computationally expensive, which raises costs and may widen gaps between institutions [40,41]. Sensitive medical data require governance, encryption, auditing, retention limits, and clear responsibility for errors. Biased training data may produce unequal performance across sex, age, ethnicity, language, disability, or socioeconomic groups [39]. Systems should therefore undergo subgroup validation and continuous monitoring.

    Overreliance may also reduce independent reasoning or encourage deskilling [24]. Curricula should require learners to make an initial independent assessment before viewing AI suggestions, explain disagreements with the system, and complete periodic no-AI assessments. Human educators should approve cases, supervise use, evaluate performance, and remain accountable for educational decisions.


    Key Messages

    LLMs and metaverse-related technologies may strengthen urology education when their roles are clearly differentiated and deliberately integrated. LLMs are most useful for cognitive apprenticeship, documentation, formative assessment, and supervised communication practice. XR, haptics, cloud platforms, and virtual digital humans are most useful for spatial, procedural, and remote learning. Neither technological fluency nor visual realism is equivalent to competence.

    Future Directions

    The field should move from speculative demonstrations to competency-based implementation and prospective validation. The next generation of studies should report transparent model behavior, haptic and biomechanical fidelity, subgroup performance, educational authenticity, retention, and transfer to clinical practice. A staged, equitable, and human-supervised approach offers a more defensible path toward intelligent urology education than the assumption that automation or immersion will inevitably improve training.

    Acknowledgments

    YY and YL are co-corresponding authors on this work, and YL can be reached by email at k_lyq@sina.com. During the preparation of this work, the author(s) used ChatGPT 5.6 Sol (OpenAI) and DeepSeek V4 Pro solely for language polishing and improvement of readability. Generative AI (Google Gemini 3.1) was used solely to assist with figure design and layout. It was not used for data analysis, interpretation, or initial manuscript writing. The authors reviewed and approved the final figure. After using these tools/services, the author(s) reviewed and edited the content as needed and take full responsibility for the content of the published article. ChatGPT 5.6 Sol (OpenAI) was used in the preparation of the revised manuscript for language polishing, structural revision, and assistance in drafting responses to reviewer comments. The authors reviewed, revised, and verified the manuscript and remain responsible for its content; no AI tool is an author, and no unpublished patient-identifiable information was entered into a generative AI system.

    Funding

    This work was supported by the Educational Science Research Project of Beijing University of Chinese Medicine (number XJZ24003) and General Program Research Project of Beijing Higher Education Association (number MS2024379).

    Data Availability

    Not applicable.

    Authors' Contributions

    Conceptualization: PL, HG, YY

    Data curation: PL, HG, SH

    Funding acquisition: YY, HG

    Writing – original draft: PL, HG

    Writing – review & editing: YL, YY

    All authors reviewed the results and approved the final version of the manuscript.

    Conflicts of Interest

    None declared.

    1. Hori K, Abe T, Abe N, et al. Gap analysis between trainees’ subjective competencies and the competencies expected by instructors in urology: a need assessment survey in Japan. Int J Urol. Jun 2024;31(6):653-661. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    2. Hughes T, Rai B, Madaan S, Chedgy E, Somani B. The availability, cost, limitations, learning curve and future of robotic systems in urology and prostate cancer surgery. J Clin Med. Mar 15, 2023;12(6):2268. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    3. Bhat GS, Nelivigi G, Barude V, Shastry A. Sexuality in surgically treated carcinoma penis patients and their partners. Indian J Surg. Feb 2018;80(1):19-23. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    4. Checcucci E, Veccia A, Puliatti S, et al. Metaverse in surgery - origins and future potential. Nat Rev Urol. Jan 2026;23(1):50-63. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    5. Leng L. Challenge, integration, and change: ChatGPT and future anatomical education. Med Educ Online. Dec 31, 2024;29(1):2304973. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    6. Miao Y, Wen J, Luo Y, Li J. MedARC: adaptive multi-agent refinement and collaboration for enhanced medical reasoning in large language models. Int J Med Inform. Feb 2026;206:106136. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    7. Almansour M, Soliman M, Aldekhyyel R, Binkheder S, Temsah MH, Malki KH. An academic viewpoint (2025) on the integration of generative artificial intelligence in medical education: transforming learning and practices. Cureus. Mar 25, 2025;17(3):e81145. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    8. Javid M, Reddiboina M, Bhandari M. Emergence of artificial generative intelligence and its potential impact on urology. Can J Urol. Aug 2023;30(4):11588-11598. [Medline]
    9. Singhal K, Tu T, Gottweis J, et al. Toward expert-level medical question answering with large language models. Nat Med. Mar 2025;31(3):943-950. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    10. Thirunavukarasu AJ, Ting DSJ, Elangovan K, Gutierrez L, Tan TF, Ting DSW. Large language models in medicine. Nat Med. Aug 2023;29(8):1930-1940. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    11. Wen Y, Li X, Zeng F, Lei J, Chen S. Application of medical record quality control system based on artificial intelligence [Article in Chinese]. J Sichuan Univ (Med Sci). Nov 20, 2023;54(6):1263-1268. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    12. Mukadam A, Suresh S, Jacobs C. Beyond traditional simulation: an exploratory study on the effectiveness and acceptability of ChatGPT‑4o advanced voice mode for communication skills practice among medical students. Cureus. May 19, 2025;17(5):e84381. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    13. Karampinis E, Bozi Tzetzi DA, Pappa G, et al. Use of a large language model as a dermatology case narrator: exploring the dynamics of a chatbot as an educational tool in dermatology. JMIR Dermatol. Sep 16, 2025;8:e72058. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    14. Germanà E, Pepe L, Pizzimenti C, et al. Programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) immunohistochemical expression in advanced urothelial bladder carcinoma: an updated review with clinical and pathological implications. Int J Mol Sci. Jun 19, 2024;25(12):6750. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    15. Pepe P, Pepe L, Fiorentino V, Curduman M, Pennisi M, Fraggetta F. PSMA PET/CT accuracy in diagnosing prostate cancer nodes metastases. In Vivo. 2024;38(6):2880-2885. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    16. Fiorentino V, Pepe L, Pizzimenti C, et al. PD-L1 expression in prostate cancer and Gleason Grade Group: is there any relationship? Findings from a multi-institutional cohort. Pathol Res Pract. May 2025;269:155916. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    17. Yang X, Chen A, PourNejatian N, et al. A large language model for electronic health records. NPJ Digit Med. Dec 26, 2022;5(1):194. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    18. Yu H, Zhou J, Li L, et al. Simulated patient systems powered by large language model-based AI agents offer potential for transforming medical education. Commun Med (Lond). 2026;6(1):27. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    19. Bolton E, Venigalla A, Yasunaga M, et al. BioMedLM: a 2.7B parameter language model trained on biomedical text. arXiv. Preprint posted online on Mar 27, 2024. [CrossRef]
    20. Hetz MJ, Carl N, Haggenmüller S, et al. Superhuman performance on urology board questions using an explainable language model enhanced with European Association of Urology guidelines. ESMO Real World Data Digit Oncol. Dec 2024;6:100078. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    21. Elhilali A, Ngo ASH, Reichenpfader D, Denecke K. Large language model-based patient simulation to foster communication skills in health care professionals: user-centered development and usability study. JMIR Med Educ. Dec 12, 2025;11:e81271. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    22. Yi Y, Kim KJ. The feasibility of using generative artificial intelligence for history taking in virtual patients. BMC Res Notes. Feb 24, 2025;18(1):80. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    23. Cook DA. Creating virtual patients using large language models: scalable, global, and low cost. Med Teach. Jan 2025;47(1):40-42. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    24. Patino GA, Amiel JM, Brown M, Lypson ML, Chan TM. The promise and perils of artificial intelligence in health professions education practice and scholarship. Acad Med. May 1, 2024;99(5):477-481. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    25. Yeung AWK, Tosevska A, Klager E, et al. Virtual and augmented reality applications in medicine: analysis of the scientific literature. J Med Internet Res. Feb 10, 2021;23(2):e25499. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    26. Frankiewicz M, Vetterlein MW, Matuszewski M, Young Academic Urologists (YAU) Trauma and Reconstructive Urology Working Group. VR, reconstructive urology and the future of surgery education. Nat Rev Urol. Jun 2023;20(6):325-326. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    27. Tokas T, Ortner G, Peteinaris A, et al. Simulation training in transurethral resection/laser vaporization of the prostate; evidence from a systematic review by the European Section of Uro-Technology. World J Urol. May 2022;40(5):1091-1110. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    28. Malpani A, Vedula SS, Lin HC, Hager GD, Taylor RH. Effect of real-time virtual reality-based teaching cues on learning needle passing for robot-assisted minimally invasive surgery: a randomized controlled trial. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. Jul 2020;15(7):1187-1194. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    29. Kallidonis P, Peteinaris A, Ortner G, et al. Transurethral resection of bladder tumor: a systematic review of simulator-based training courses and curricula. Asian J Urol. Jan 2024;11(1):1-9. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    30. Talyshinskii A, Hameed BZ, Zhanbyrbekuly U, et al. Role of virtual reality in improving the spatial perception of the kidney during flexible ureteroscopy: a feasibility study using virtual reality simulators and 3D models. Curr Urol. Mar 2024;18(1):24-29. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    31. Qi Z, Corr F, Grimm D, Nimsky C, Bopp MHA. Extended reality-based head-mounted displays for surgical education: a ten-year systematic review. Bioengineering (Basel). Jul 23, 2024;11(8):741. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    32. Patel V, Saikali S, Kavoussi L, et al. Best practices in telesurgery: framework and recommendations from the society of robotic surgery (SRS) for safe and effective implementation. J Robot Surg. Jul 11, 2025;19(1):370. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    33. From Rome to Beijing - remote robotic surgery. Surgery International. Jun 26, 2024. URL: https://surgery.international/from-rome-to-beijing-remote-robotic-surgery/ [Accessed 2026-10-09]
    34. Anyinkeng AB, Girma SM, Maurice T, JohnPaul E, Hiwot T, Awad AK. The role of remote and virtual surgical training in expanding cardiothoracic surgical capacity in low-resource regions. BMC Surg. Aug 25, 2025;25(1):393. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    35. Chen C, Wenli Z, Yue W, Xue S, Qidong L, Kun S. Research on the construction of a medical education metaverse based on cloudytization technique [Article in Chinese]. China Med Equip. 2025;22(1):138-142. [CrossRef]
    36. Qin H, Lei J. The application of virtual reality technology in advertising communication. In: 2019 International Conference on Virtual Reality and Intelligent Systems (ICVRIS). IEEE:73-76. [CrossRef] ISBN: 9781728150505
    37. Qing L, Yong L. Design and path planning of the standard system of educational virtual digital human [Article in Chinese]. Mod Educ Technol. Jul 2024;34:70-80. URL: https://www.sciopen.com/article/10.3969/j.issn.1009-8097.2024.07.008 [Accessed 2026-09-30]
    38. Vernez SL, Huynh V, Osann K, Okhunov Z, Landman J, Clayman RV. C-SATS: assessing surgical skills among urology residency applicants. J Endourol. Apr 2017;31(S1):S95-S100. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    39. Obermeyer Z, Powers B, Vogeli C, Mullainathan S. Dissecting racial bias in an algorithm used to manage the health of populations. Science. Oct 25, 2019;366(6464):447-453. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    40. Lee LH, Braud T, Zhou PY, et al. All one needs to know about metaverse: a complete survey on technological singularity, virtual ecosystem, and research agenda. Found Trends Hum-Comput Interact. Nov 6, 2024;18(2-3):100-337. [CrossRef]
    41. Gozum IEA. How can the principle of justice as fairness help address the digital divide in AI and healthcare? J Public Health (Oxf). Mar 2025;47(1):e187-e188. [CrossRef] [Medline]

    ‎
    LLM: large language model
    XR: extended reality

    Edited by Taiane de Azevedo Cardoso; submitted 10.Feb.2026; peer-reviewed by Emmanouil Karampinis, Tuba Düzcü, Vincenzo Fiorentino; final revised version received 23.Sep.2026; accepted 23.Sep.2026; published 19.Oct.2026.

    Copyright

    © Peizhe Li, Huijie Gong, Heyang Liu, Siyu Han, Yiqin Lu, Yongji Yan. Originally published in JMIR Medical Education (https://mededu.jmir.org), 19.Oct.2026.

    This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIR Medical Education, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on https://mededu.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.